Posted on 08/26/2014 12:17:40 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Two New York farmers who hold weddings on their property have been fined after disinviting a gay couple who hoped to tie the knot there. Is this a win for gay rights, or an encroachment on religious liberty? As is only to be expected, a fresh wave of controversy is swirling around a court’s imposition of massive fines on two New York farmers who don’t want a gay couple to get married on their property.
In today’s news cycle, where outrage is instinctively deployed as a weapon against our memory, the story of the Giffords (who owned the farm) versus the McCarthys (who wanted to get married there) may become little more than a fleeting blip on our frantic radar. But it is worth more than an ounce of attention, because it offers a glimpse at an inhuman future where celebration is enforced by law and punished with arbitrary takings.
It takes an effort to think beyond the clear culture-war confines of the case. Some of us will be outraged that the Giffords rescinded their implicit invitation to the McCarthys because, as court papers document, they said their “specific religious belief regarding marriage” created “a little bit of a problem.”
Others among us will freak at the fact that the Giffords were dragged to court—wherein administrative judge Migdalia Pares decided that the McCarthys suffered “mental anguish” worth exactly $3,000 of the Giffords’ money.
Perhaps more than a few of us will flip their lids on account of Judge Pares’ further judgment that the Giffords were so awful that only 10,000 more of their dollars could rebalance the scales of justice.
Now that we have gotten over these multifarious horribles, we are obliged to ponder the bigger picture.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
> The issue is that, if your business is considered a “public accommodation”, you may be prohibited by law from discriminating based on “protected classes”. Sexual orientation is not one of those classes under federal law, but it is under many state laws.
But, did the wedding facility owners and the cake bakers discriminate against persons or did they discriminate against products?
Must a bakery sell car batteries to a homosexual person? Can a baker refuse to sell car batteries to a homosexual person? A heterosexual person?
Homosexual marriage, if you can call it that, I can’t, is a direct offense against society, and should never, never be allowed.
They make the police agree with the looting in Ferguson and they make the police agree with the gays in attacking traditional families.
It is all part of the plan of appeasement of terrorists in order to deflect police state occupation and corruption inquiries.
“Must a bakery sell car batteries to a homosexual person? Can a baker refuse to sell car batteries to a homosexual person? A heterosexual person?”
The courts have ruled several times that refusing the normal services you would provide anyone else is violating those laws. So, no they wouldn’t have to sell him a car battery, as they don’t sell anyone a car battery.
The 1965 Civil Rights act is unConstitutional. This is all fruit a poisoned racist apple
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.